In conventional flexible order transaction systems in manufacturing, merging orders that are already in progress is possible but is limited in the way production is mapped between the merging order and in how scrap and work-in-process quantities are merged. For example, if a production process for the surviving order (i.e., the order remaining after the merge) involves 5 steps S1-S5 and the production process for the merging order (i.e., the order that disappears after the merge) involves 10 steps M1-M10, the merging order may typically be merged with the surviving order at single pair of mapped steps (e.g., M1 to S3). This mapping may occur between reporting points for the steps. A reporting point is the conclusion of a discrete step in a production process where an accurate accounting of the progress of an order may be made. Reporting points may be used to define the steps in the production process and it is typically at one pair of reporting points that orders are merged. Scrap and work-in-process (WIP) quantities are also merged where they exist at the mapped reporting points. However, scrap and WIP is not merged in conventional systems where they occur at reporting points not mapped from the merging order to the surviving order—conventional systems are limited to merging scrap and WIP only at mapped reporting points, referred to as “hard merging” of the scrap and WIP. Conventional flexible order transaction systems do no provide the ability to merge in progress production orders at multiple reporting points across the production process. Even the merging that is allowed is limited to merging scrap and WIP at the mapped reporting points.
Conventional flexible order transaction systems incorporate order merge functionality for production orders but do not provide for the detailed merging of orders at multiple reporting points across the production process. For example, the Oracle® Shop Floor Management 11i system is one example of a conventional flexible order transaction system. The SAP® Discrete Industry add-on is another example and incorporates order merge functionality for process orders. Additionally, these conventional systems limit the merging of work-in-process (WIP) to mapped reporting points between the merging and surviving order.
Providing greater flexibility in merging already in progress production orders is important for a number a reasons. This flexibility can help manufacturers who often need to bring an order or lot up to an efficient production order size. When several orders have dropped below the target order size due to scrap (i.e., unsuccessfully processed product) or splits (i.e., order splitting) or when subsequent steps in a production process are more efficient with larger order sizes, merging orders in a flexible manner can greatly enhance efficiency. For example, orders that were previously split may need to be reassembled before shipment to another plant or production line where larger order sizes are more cost efficient. Merging orders may also solve unexpected capacity constraints in the production process. These enhancements may be achieved through a more detailed merging of orders allowing the merge to occur at several reporting points mapped between the processes of the orders. A more detailed method for the transfer of WIP from a merging order to a surviving order may also improve a flexible order transaction system.